The maps have been a matter of great difficulty. I somewhat regret that it has been found needful to bind them separately from the text, because this looks as if they made some pretensions to the character of an historical atlas. To this they lay no claim. They are meant simply to illustrate the text, and in no way enter into competition either with such an elaborate collection as that of SprunerMenke, or even with collections much less elaborate than that. Those maps are meant to be companions in studying the history of the several periods. Mine do not pretend to do more than to illustrate changes of boundary in a general way. It was found, as the work went on, that it was better on the whole to increase the number of maps, even at the expense of making each map smaller. There are disadvantages both ways. In the maps of South-Eastern Europe, for instance, it was found impossible to show the small states which arose in Greece after the Latin Conquest at all clearly. But this evil seemed to be counterbalanced by giving as many pictures as might be of the shifting frontier of the Eastern Empire towards the Bulgarian, the Frank, and the Ottoman. In one or two instances I have taken some small liberties with my dates. Thus, for instance, the map of the greatest extent of the Saracen dominion shows all the countries which were at any time under the Saracen power. But there was no one moment when the Saracen power took in the whole extent shown in the map. Sind and Septimania were lost before Crete and Sicily were won. But such a view as I have given seemed on the whole more instructive than it would have been to substitute two or three maps showing the various losses and gains at a few years' distance from one another. I have to thank a crowd of friends, including some whom I have never seen, for many hints, and for much help given in various ways. Such are Professor Pauli of Göttingen, Professor Steenstrup of Copenhagen, Professor Romanos of Corfu, M. J.-B. Galiffe of Geneva, Dr. Paul Turner of Budapest, Professor A. W. Ward of Manchester, the Rev. H. F. Tozer, Mr. Ralston, Mr. Morfill, Mrs. Humphry Ward, and my son-in-law Arthur John Evans, whose praise is in all South-Slavonic lands. SOMERLEAZE, WELLS: December 16, 1880. CONTENTS. Advance and extent of the Roman dominion; the Mediter- 5-6 8-9 § 3. Geographical Distribution of Races. Europe an Aryan continent-non-Aryan remnants and GREECE AND THE GREEK COLONIES. § 1. The Eastern or Greek Peninsula. Geographical and historical characteristics of the Eastern, CONTENTS. Their submission to Lydians and Persians The Thracian colonies; abiding greatness of Thessalonikê and Byzantion More distant colonies; Sicily, Italy, Dalmatia Parts of the Mediterranean not colonized by the Greeks; PAGE 32-33 34-35 § 7. Growth of Macedonia and Epeiros. Growth of Macedonia; Philip; Alexander and the Succes- sors; effects of their conquests Epeiros under Pyrrhos; Athamania The Macedonian kingdoms; Egypt; Syria Sinôpê; Bosporos § 8. Later Geography of Independent Greece. The Confederations; Achaia, Aitolia; smaller confedera- FORMATION OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE. Meanings of the name Italy; its extent under the Roman Characteristics of the Italian peninsula; the great islands |